clarifications

In my last blog entry i wrote about my Master "not showing up the second night and not getting in touch for the following 24 hours". i realise now, after hearing a couple of comments, that this may have been misleading. My Master did text me to tell me he wouldn't be able to come and see me. It is to my subsequent texts that there was no reply. Clearly when i wrote what i wrote i did so feeling hurt that he hadn't chosen to make this happen. I presume i have a way of looking at a Master thinking that he is omnipotent and can make things happen if he wants. The truth is Masters too have commitments, engagements, jobs, etc. It is true that he didn't make things happen and that is something that i felt sad about and that, yes, i even resented him for, but he didn't just not show up without warning, and ultimately i had chosen to go to Glasgow knowing that i might not meet him at all.

Since coming back to London i have spoken to him again and i have asked that he considers releasing me on account of circumstances being such that prevent him from making much use of my services. He is considering my request and whether he is able to make changes to continue keeping me.

But there is something else that i have not yet managed to work into this blog. I guess it's something i don't feel too proud about: i have accepted to give someone priority over owning me, should i be released by my current owner. I don't feel too proud about that because i think i shouldn't even consider something like this while i'm supposed to be owned but this ownership has had so many ups and downs, so many uncertainties, and the man in question has been very present and supportive and i didn't want to deny his request.

But he is aware that my efforts at the moment are focused on adapting to a form of ownership that will enable me to continue to serve my current owner if at all possible.